开云体育

Ellen,

This is scholarly writing about literature that is on a much higher
standard than I typically see in this sort of mainstream media article
about Austen (or Austen-related)

The best part of Ferguson's article for me is this section:

"The heroines are often imprisoned in remote, atmospheric locations where
supernatural events appear to take place. “That gives us a real sense of
terror,” said Wright. “It’s quite psychological, before psychology was
invented. She uses the image of the decayed castle or crumbling convent to
explore the precarious and outmoded issue of marriage laws in England,
where coverture meant a woman’s legal identity and her property effectively
disappeared when she married. So she shows young women in distress, in
really exciting, action-packed narratives, with the aim of showing the
precarious nature of a young female’s existence who has no protection in
蝉辞肠颈别迟测.”

By empowering her heroines with the strength and resilience they need to
escape and marry the men they choose, Radcliffe is “very staunchly” showing
that women can successfully resist domination, Wright said.

“There is a sense of Radcliffe critiquing patriarchy and men who think they
can dictate to women precisely what we should do and what we should give to
them in marriage. So in many ways it is feminist literature, on a par with
what Mary Wollstonecraft was arguing in *A Vindication of the Rights of
Women
<>*
.”

At one point, a Radcliffe villain tells his victim: “You speak like a
heroine, let us see if you can suffer like one.”

Wright added: “There’s always a happy ending and a good resolution. But
there’s a sense of a heroine being able to manoeuvre that resolution.”

END QUOTE FROM FERGUSON ARTICLE

However, even Ferguson fails to take the final step in her chain of logic,
which is that it's not just some "men who think they can dictate to women"
- that domination was baked into the patriarchal system of marriage - and
the central, most insidious part of that domination was the wife's lack of
control in "normal" marriage over her own body - hence serial pregnancy and
death in childbirth as "normal".

As I've said 1000 times, Henry Tilney's rant about what couldn't happen in
a Christian nation is the epicenter of Jane Austen's critique of marriage
in Northanger Abbey - YES IT COULD, AND DID, HAPPEN, all the time, and yet,
no clergyman, politician, or male public intellectual was railing against
this plague.

Catherine's theories about General Tilney may have been wrong in specifics,
but she was spot-on in essentials - and Jane Austen pretty much says that,
in code, at the end of the novel.


ARNIE

Henry's rant wasn't about marriage. It was about riots. It was written
while the Gordon Anti-Papist riots were still remembered by older people.
I do not find women isolated in spooky castles very threatening even
considering the times, It fails in such symbolism for me. Much more
pertinent are some of the court cases where a wife is trying to separate
from her husband because of his cruelty, or male employers and sometimes
their male servants attack female servants. Maria or the Wrongs of Women
is much more frightening.
Nancy

On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 1:37?PM Arnie Perlstein via groups.io
<arnieperlstein@...> wrote:

Ellen,

This is scholarly writing about literature that is on a much higher
standard than I typically see in this sort of mainstream media article
about Austen (or Austen-related)

The best part of Ferguson's article for me is this section:

"The heroines are often imprisoned in remote, atmospheric locations where
supernatural events appear to take place. “That gives us a real sense of
terror,” said Wright. “It’s quite psychological, before psychology was
invented. She uses the image of the decayed castle or crumbling convent to
explore the precarious and outmoded issue of marriage laws in England,
where coverture meant a woman’s legal identity and her property effectively
disappeared when she married. So she shows young women in distress, in
really exciting, action-packed narratives, with the aim of showing the
precarious nature of a young female’s existence who has no protection in
蝉辞肠颈别迟测.”

By empowering her heroines with the strength and resilience they need to
escape and marry the men they choose, Radcliffe is “very staunchly” showing
that women can successfully resist domination, Wright said.

“There is a sense of Radcliffe critiquing patriarchy and men who think they
can dictate to women precisely what we should do and what we should give to
them in marriage. So in many ways it is feminist literature, on a par with
what Mary Wollstonecraft was arguing in *A Vindication of the Rights of
Women
<

*

.”

At one point, a Radcliffe villain tells his victim: “You speak like a
heroine, let us see if you can suffer like one.”

Wright added: “There’s always a happy ending and a good resolution. But
there’s a sense of a heroine being able to manoeuvre that resolution.”

END QUOTE FROM FERGUSON ARTICLE

However, even Ferguson fails to take the final step in her chain of logic,
which is that it's not just some "men who think they can dictate to women"
- that domination was baked into the patriarchal system of marriage - and
the central, most insidious part of that domination was the wife's lack of
control in "normal" marriage over her own body - hence serial pregnancy and
death in childbirth as "normal".

As I've said 1000 times, Henry Tilney's rant about what couldn't happen in
a Christian nation is the epicenter of Jane Austen's critique of marriage
in Northanger Abbey - YES IT COULD, AND DID, HAPPEN, all the time, and yet,
no clergyman, politician, or male public intellectual was railing against
this plague.

Catherine's theories about General Tilney may have been wrong in specifics,
but she was spot-on in essentials - and Jane Austen pretty much says that,
in code, at the end of the novel.


ARNIE

Obviously, Nancy, you disagree with the author of that article, and even
more so with me. His rant may have been against imagining English husbands
murdering or confining their wives - but I say it was also,
ventriloquistically, Jane Austen's rant about what English husbands did
every to their wives, which was just as bad (especially the "confining"
part).


ARNIE

On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 1:28?PM Nancy Mayer via groups.io <regencyresearcher=
[email protected]> wrote:

Henry's rant wasn't about marriage. It was about riots. It was written
while the Gordon Anti-Papist riots were still remembered by older people.
I do not find women isolated in spooky castles very threatening even
considering the times, It fails in such symbolism for me. Much more
pertinent are some of the court cases where a wife is trying to separate
from her husband because of his cruelty, or male employers and sometimes
their male servants attack female servants. Maria or the Wrongs of Women
is much more frightening.
Nancy

On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 1:37?PM Arnie Perlstein via groups.io
<arnieperlstein@...> wrote:

Ellen,

This is scholarly writing about literature that is on a much higher
standard than I typically see in this sort of mainstream media article
about Austen (or Austen-related)

The best part of Ferguson's article for me is this section:

"The heroines are often imprisoned in remote, atmospheric locations where
supernatural events appear to take place. “That gives us a real sense of
terror,” said Wright. “It’s quite psychological, before psychology was
invented. She uses the image of the decayed castle or crumbling convent

to

explore the precarious and outmoded issue of marriage laws in England,
where coverture meant a woman’s legal identity and her property

effectively

disappeared when she married. So she shows young women in distress, in
really exciting, action-packed narratives, with the aim of showing the
precarious nature of a young female’s existence who has no protection in
蝉辞肠颈别迟测.”

By empowering her heroines with the strength and resilience they need to
escape and marry the men they choose, Radcliffe is “very staunchly”

showing

that women can successfully resist domination, Wright said.

“There is a sense of Radcliffe critiquing patriarchy and men who think

they

can dictate to women precisely what we should do and what we should give

to

them in marriage. So in many ways it is feminist literature, on a par

with

what Mary Wollstonecraft was arguing in *A Vindication of the Rights of
Women
<

*

.”

At one point, a Radcliffe villain tells his victim: “You speak like a
heroine, let us see if you can suffer like one.”

Wright added: “There’s always a happy ending and a good resolution. But
there’s a sense of a heroine being able to manoeuvre that resolution.”

END QUOTE FROM FERGUSON ARTICLE

However, even Ferguson fails to take the final step in her chain of

logic,

which is that it's not just some "men who think they can dictate to

women"

- that domination was baked into the patriarchal system of marriage - and
the central, most insidious part of that domination was the wife's lack

of

control in "normal" marriage over her own body - hence serial pregnancy

and

death in childbirth as "normal".

As I've said 1000 times, Henry Tilney's rant about what couldn't happen

in

a Christian nation is the epicenter of Jane Austen's critique of marriage
in Northanger Abbey - YES IT COULD, AND DID, HAPPEN, all the time, and

yet,

no clergyman, politician, or male public intellectual was railing against
this plague.

Catherine's theories about General Tilney may have been wrong in

specifics,

but she was spot-on in essentials - and Jane Austen pretty much says

that,

in code, at the end of the novel.


ARNIE